“Whoever is lead to believe that species are mutable, will do good service by conscientiously expressing his conviction, for only thus can the load of prejudice by which this subject is overwhelmed, be removed.”

So what-ch-you know about Natural Selection? Go ahead
And ask a question and see where the answer gets you
Try bein’ passive aggressive or try smashin’ heads in
And see which tactic brings your plans to fruition
And if you have an explanation in mind, then you’re
Wastin’ your time, ‘cause the best watchmaker is blind
It takes a certain base kind of
To explain away nature with “intelligent

Of generations of competitive pressure genetically
But don’t get upset, ‘cause we’ve got the same pedigree
You and I will find a common ancestor eventually
If we rewind geological time regressively
And I could say the same for this hibiscus tree
And this lizard and this flea and this sesame seed
And if you still disbelieve in what your senses perceive
Then I could even use this rhyme as a remedy
‘Cause there’s so much variation in the styles in this industry
And differential survival when the people listening
Decide what they’re into and what really isn’t interesting

The weak and the strong, who got it goin’ on?
We lived in the dark for so long
The weak and the strong, Darwin got it goin’ on
Creationism is dead wrong
The weak and the strong, who got it goin’ on?Whoever leaves the most spawn
The weak and the strong, Darwin got it goin’ on
Creationism is erroneous

I hear some people complain, like “I don’t wanna be an ape!
I never came from monkey DNA!
I believe God made me in a day – Jesus saves!”
Yeah, he’s great, but stop bein’ afraid
To use the reason “he” gave you to let science solve
Some giant problems and find some final results

Wondering at the infinite depth of divine thought
And realizing that scripture can never define God
‘Cause if there is a personal God, then he’s been jerkin’ off
So why would he bother designing an albatross
Especially when natural selection does such an excellent job
Just by balancing benefits and costs?
I say banish God into the gaps
If he can’t help us understand the simplest facts
I want a relaxed God of infinite naps
We’ll be all right without him, just give us a chance

The weak and the strong, who got it goin’ on
We lived in the dark for so long
The weak and the strong, Darwin got it goin’ on
Creationism is dead wrong

13 Responses to Natural Selection

Baba, I am extremely impressed by your lyrical ability combined with your complex understanding of human behavior in relation to evolutionary theory. It is unusual for a person to be so gifted in two so diverse ways, and be able to combine them successfully, if not brilliantly. I had a couple of suggestions for concepts for you to write about but as I listened to your tracks, I was pleased to hear you touch on them! I am a naturalist, and am currently studying marine science and near shore environments. I have often argued that humans in many ways have removed themselves from natural selection but it still manifests itself in ways sociological, psychological, and in everyday behaviors we take for granted. I see more and more parallels in the behavior of marine organisms and humans (some of which do not even possess a brain or anything like one), and am beginning to think we are not as separated from the “animals” as we would like to think. Perhaps your writing has stripped away some of the arrogance of my previous thinking, thank you. “Nothing to believe, something to percieve.” I have evidence of natural selection on my bookshelf, seashells created only a few thousand years apart, but the morphology is diferent basesd on abiotic and biotic factors. Love it! Dont ever stop.

Citation: “Okay, it’s time to reveal my identity
I’m the manifestation of tens of millions
Of centuries of sexual selection, best believe
I’m the best of the best of the best of the best”

Well, evolution and the survival of the fittest doesn’t mean that any surviving creature is in any way “the best”, unless you mean by this phrase “best adapted to a certain historical situation”. Don’t forget the importance of chances and likelihood, evolution is not a process that’s able to learn. We can merely say: It develops by chance. So of them are higher in certain situations, it’s far from perfection. Don’t get too proud of being actually some kind of top of the evolution, soon life will get over this population called humankind … but please don’t stop rhyming. We need more of this!

I loved this and I would really like to use a version of it in my high school biology class; however, I can float the whole thing until the mention of god is a jerk off or jerking off? I don’t suppose you have a slightly modified version that will only have half the town after after me instead of the entire community burning a cross on my front lawn? Just curious from a mildly religious conservative community of nutty . . . .

I applaud your efforts to teach about evolution through music. However, I wonder at some of your word choices. Why is it that you insult people’s belief in God by saying, “‘Cause if there is a personal God, then he’s been jerkin’ off…I say banish God into the gaps…We’ll be all right without him, just give us a chance”? Why in the world would people want to ‘give [you] a chance’ after you’ve insulted their deeply held beliefs?

Also, this sort of commentary forces people into a false choice between God and science, thereby only entrenching people in their views. By not overtly removing God from evolution (by the way, why do evolutionary scientists even discuss religion? cell biologists do not), people can believe God created life to evolve. Why not? Carl Sagan once wrote, “Science is not only compatible with spirituality; it is a profound source of spirituality.” When religious people are not forced to choose between one or the other, they are free to believe in both.

I agree with the line “And realizing that scripture can never define God”. Very true. That people do define God and the genesis/origins of Life by what the Bible and Genesis says is a religious problem, not a scientific one–one that the scientific world cannot solve by trying to get people to reject God or the Bible. That people read the Bible as completely literal, that, too, is a religious problem, not a scientific one, and, again, one that the scientific world cannot solve. Why not be perplexed about people’s rejection of evolution? There is no reason to ‘believe’ in mitosis; it just is. Same goes for evolution. Yet, many people believe that God created life to evolve, perhaps even had a hand in how it happened. Why is that worthy of ridicule? Such beliefs can neither be proven nor disproven.

The parts of the song that focused solely on Darwin’s theory are pretty good, but the numerous times beliefs in God were ridiculed or Creationism mentioned makes this song seem less about the theory of evolution and its processes than it is a song debating religious views as to whether or not God exists. Why include that debate in a song purportedly intended to teach evolution?

Carl Sagan wrote in The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark, “The chief deficiency I see in the skeptical movement is its polarization: Us vs. Them — the sense that we have a monopoly on the truth; that those other people who believe in all these stupid doctrines are morons; that if you’re sensible, you’ll listen to us; and if not, to hell with you. This is nonconstructive. It does not get our message across. It condemns us to permanent minority status.”

Ridiculing religious beliefs will not get the religious to elevate their thinking, rather, you may achieve quite the opposite.

Emily, thank you for your thoughtful comments. It’s true this song contains strong statements that might be seen as “outside the purview” of teaching evolution, but as I said in my recent response to a concerned teacher, these deliberately provocative statements are meant to point to a serious and very relevant debate about the relationship between religion and science.

The lines you quoted about a “personal god… jerkin’ off” and “banish god into the gaps” and “we’ll be alright without him” etc, are meant to highlight the fact that science has no place for miraculous (as opposed to natural or causal) explanations, and evolutionary science is no different. This is, in fact, the reason science is so effective as an explanatory tool, and Darwin clearly presented his theory as an alternative to the theory of divine special creation, not as a complement to it.

Whether individuals decide to maintain a personal sense of faith is not my concern, but I did want to address this question, and I try to only ridicule religious beliefs when they directly oppose or compete with scientific explanations.

For teachers who wish to avoid the religious implications of Darwin’s theory, the videos for Artificial Selection and DNA focus more closely on the technical side of how evolution works.

Fantastic stuff, Baba – music, rhyming, performance, content … this is a tremendous resource for schools to explore a truly critical area of human knowledge …

But (there has to be a “but” …) why the downer on social constructivism and Foucault?! Social constructivists don’t have any beef with evolutionary theory, surely? … if they would contest anything in this area, it would be any last vestiges of teleology – that evolution was tending towards an ordained or ‘purposeful’ end … but they certainly wouldn’t want to question the empirical truth of the evolutionary process …

Entirely understandable, but please consider adding one of the other videos, maybe Artificial Selection or I’m A African. I wrote and recorded those lines before the project morphed into an education initiative, and I concede they aren’t appropriate for all audiences. That’s rap for you!